On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:11:37 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:

> 90% of mankind are sheep and are lost without a sheppherd.

Funny that the only people who say that are only too willing to put
themselves forward as shepherds or guardians of our morals.
That is so offensive to the ordinary working person. We need our
betters to tell us what to do, I don't think!
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:11:37 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
> wrote:
>
> > 90% of mankind are sheep and are lost without a sheppherd.
>
> Funny that the only people who say that are only too willing to put
> themselves forward as shepherds or guardians of our morals.

I certainly am not well suited for that task.

> That is so offensive to the ordinary working person. We need our
> betters to tell us what to do, I don't think!

I apologise.  I'm as much of a sinner as anyone else.  But perhaps you say that
because we're part of those 10% free-thinkers.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:36:05 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 08:11:37 EST, "nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 90% of mankind are sheep and are lost without a sheppherd.
>>
>> Funny that the only people who say that are only too willing to put
>> themselves forward as shepherds or guardians of our morals.
>
>I certainly am not well suited for that task.

You might say that but I couldn't possibly comment.

>> That is so offensive to the ordinary working person. We need our
>> betters to tell us what to do, I don't think!
>
>I apologise.  I'm as much of a sinner as anyone else.  But perhaps you say that
>because we're part of those 10% free-thinkers.
>
>
Sorry, I was brought up a Presbyterian who was taught that you don't
need anyone to stand between you and your morals. I realise that this
is not the same for everyone.
But to say that the vast majority of people need to be told how to
live is elitism. IMO The vast majority of people need food and an
education and not to be oppressed.  
And as for being as much of a sinner as anyone else. Then stop being
one and that includes the sins of making people believe in your small
god and starting sentences with and or but. (A particular failing of
mine.) But I don't think that I'll go to Hell because of it. " 'Cause
this is Hell nor am I out of it."

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
>> Well, for people that shoot themselves in the foot, this one had to an 
>> RPG. PZ Myers, a fairly well known, but hardly world wide known, name in 
>> the so called debate between 1 AD theology and 2008 AD science, and who 
>> was interviewed, (or more like mugged), for the movie Expelled, has been 
>> expelled from the line for the movie in the Mall of America. He was 
>> there in the twin cities, with his family, and other atheists, to attend 
>> a convention *for* atheists. I will leave the punchline of who **did** 
>> get let in instead for those reading the post (Hint: This person **is** 
>> known world wide, and they also misused interview material from him in 
>> it).
> 
>   For some reason I didn't understand that paragraph at all.
> 
>   Anyways, this subject is boring. Could we please pass? I don't think
> this server needs yet another "let's all bash ID wackos" megathread.
> 
I don't think we need it either, but I am afraid we will have a couple 
of other ones to come. And they will also be mostly a intra-US flame war 
only.
So let me try to put it in a European perspective ;)
What is at stake here is nothing less than the survival of the US 
itself. On one side the group of people that noticed that moral 
behaviour is dropping while (or because) religion is losing ground with 
respect to when they were young. At which point you might shrug and 
quote some ancient roman guy (or even older) who said that already 2000+ 
years ago, but that is not the point. They feel it is something that 
never happened before and that it is their (holy) task to restore 
religion and moral values. To a certain extend I think they have a point 
(proving that I am getting old also). Some of these people came up with 
an ingenious way to increase the impact of religion on society. The 
major problem is that people nowadays are taught to think for themselves 
and not just listen to the religious leaders. So the first goal should 
be to attack science classes. And as we all know they devised a theory 
that superficially might pass as science. Before condemning then, we 
should keep in mind that their ultimate goal is to protect the ethics 
and morality of the US people. If they don't do it, the US will slide 
down a path to hell. Second, note that it is so close to a scientific 
theory that some people started to realize that it really might contain 
some value, and that at least there are things that should be rigorously 
checked before being dismissed. For argument's sake call the latter the 
'real believers' and the original group the 'pragmatics'. What happens 
again and again is that whenever a 'real believer' thinks he finds 
something, the pragmatics jump on it and even before the first 
scientific test it is proclaimed a dogma. While I do have respect for 
'real believers', the 'pragmatics' kills every attempt at science in the 
US (which, as I have already pointed out, is exactly what is needed to 
save the country). It is slightly different here in Europe, but most 
debates even here are centered around the rubbish from the 'pragmatics' 
and, hence, killed prematurely.
The other side of the debate is that another group in the US thinks that 
science is not evil but necessary for the survival of the country. The 
educational system is in a bad condition (even worse now that John had 
to leave) and they have to import scientist from all over the world to 
keep the economy running. That will only work as long as the US is a 
healthy economy and can afford these imports. The US may just survive 
the current economic crisis, but if they don't get the average US 
citizen involved in science the whole system may collapse next time 
because of a lack of well-trained people. What happens next will depend 
on who will be the next economic superpower. If it is Europe or Japan, 
they will still have some change of recovery. If it is e.g. China there 
is a big change that even IP will not be protected and the US will loose 
everything. Simply because the biggest player will dictate the rules.

In conclusion: two scenarios for doom and two completely opposite 
solutions to prevent that. Let the flame wars continue.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> You might say that but I couldn't possibly comment.

I'm just a software programmer, not even seeking to dominate the world 
by inventing some super AI and calling it G.O.D.

> Sorry, I was brought up a Presbyterian who was taught that you don't
> need anyone to stand between you and your morals.

And happy you are.  Most people in the world are brought up to 
revere/worship/follow religious authorities, dictators, kings, 
politicians, popstars, cult authors etc.  It seems to be in human nature 
to be in constant search of out-of-ordinary heroes to be personal models 
of behavior.

> IMO The vast majority of people need food and an
> education and not to be oppressed.  

I agree.  Even so, I can't help but fear that most of these 
non-oppressed, educated people would still be in search of other people 
to tell them how they should live their lives -- like indeed is very 
common to see people in big industrialized cities to search for some 
help to their personal problems with psychoanalysts (a modern father of 
sorts).  The problem with people isn't education or political regimes: 
it's that they are too damn lazy to try to solve their problems and end 
up resorting to others.

> And as for being as much of a sinner as anyone else. Then stop being
> one and that includes the sins of making people believe in your small
> god

I don't force God down the throats of anyone, do I?

> and starting sentences with and or but. (A particular failing of
> mine.)

oh! :P

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> But to say that the vast majority of people need to be told how to
> live is elitism. IMO The vast majority of people need food and an
> education and not to be oppressed.  

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding nemesis but I thought he meant that the 
majority of people are willing to follow someone posturing as a leader, 
and possibly looking for this person, even if they don't need that leader.

I've seen that attitude in plenty of contexts: people just looking for 
someone to follow, not necessarily interested in forming their own opinion.

It depends on context by the way; you can be a sort of leader on certain 
questions, and go for the easier "follower" attitude on other matters. 
Hence we can all be part of both the clueless majority and enlightened 
minority ;-)


-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

Oh.  My.  God.

Um, I mean....well, you know what I mean.  <g>

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:23:28 -0700, Chambers wrote:

> And the theatre owner can ban anyone they want for any reason they want.

Any individual.  Not a particular class of people, though - in the US (at 
least) you can't ban someone for being black (for example), or ban all 
black people.  Or all white people, for that matter.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 22 Mar 2008 14:04:24 -0500, Warp wrote:

>   Anyways, this subject is boring. Could we please pass? I don't think
> this server needs yet another "let's all bash ID wackos" megathread.

Feel free to ignore the thread.  Some of us find this an amusing topic to 
discuss.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 08:36:00 -0500, Warp wrote:

>   If the argument against publishing criticism of islam is that you
>   should
> not do it if you value your life then there's something horribly wrong.

I suppose we could ask Salman Rushdie for his thoughts on that subject....

Jim

Post a reply to this message